tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post8283341997556470191..comments2024-03-26T03:31:06.199-04:00Comments on Ask a Korean!: Korea's Problem is ModernityT.K. (Ask a Korean!)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07663422474464557214noreply@blogger.comBlogger138125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-22811427459372051272014-02-10T18:03:17.164-05:002014-02-10T18:03:17.164-05:00This is a fantastic article. Do you have it in Kor...This is a fantastic article. Do you have it in Korean? I'd like to share it with a friend but she would never read so much English!<br /><br />I think that if Koreans are looking for a less stressed form of modernity to follow, Northern Europe could be a model. I mean the Scandinavian nations and to some extent also my country, Germany. Many Koreans even come here and appreciate the more relaxed pace of life, and the separation of work life and personal life. And the free university education of course. ;)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02158605131620577274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-59838468031715940922013-10-27T12:22:24.214-04:002013-10-27T12:22:24.214-04:00"Basically: people see actors as failures unl...<i>"Basically: people see actors as failures unless they are Hollywood names; authors don't matter unless they're best-sellers; musicians are irrelevant unless they're platinum-selling. John Ralston Saul has argued--and he's quite right--that it's the community playhouse, the small press (and its authors), and the local musicians who are the lifeblood of a national culture... and it is far from a long shot for someone to survive or thrive once they understand that, and design a career based on that understanding. Is it easy? No. But it's not like playing the lotto."</i><br /><br />I agree. <br /><br /><i>"By the way, yes: some people will fail, even with those more modest aims. But people fail in every field. Doctors fail--they get bored and screw up and kill a patient and a malpractice suit bars them from practicing. Teachers fail, and get fired for bucking the trend, or being poor teachers. (Not often enough, in Korea, but it happens.) Professors fail: they can't stand studying a subject they hate, plagiarize, get caught, and are booted from the field. Businesspeople fail. CEOs fail. Lawyers fail. That kind of failure is inevitable for some people who enter into every field. It's not a special property of the arts. People who pretend it is, usually are covering for a much bigger anxiety, one connected to their own personal economic dependency."</i><br /><br />I think it's a more "special property" in the arts.<br /><br />The arts are not something one can logically study for or where a proven path exists. In law, medicine or education -- if you follow the path, success is pretty much guaranteed. In the arts, no comparable certainty exists.<br /><br /><i>But only so useful. After all, why is India's suicide rate so much lower than Korea's?</i><br /><br />I don't know, but the comparison may not be relevant. India is still very poor.<br /><br /><i>"The people I know who are trapped in poverty are the ones who are are pushing 30 and still obsessively studying for gongmuwon exams they're unlikely to pass, or dealing with an incredibly selfish (unemployed, abusive, alcoholic) parent whom they ought to just disown, or who have given up their dreams to work in a job they hate... but couldn't stand to do it long enough to bankroll their so-called futures. Some are just unfortunate--I have one friend whose story is heartbreaking--but most of the people I know in dire straits ironically ended up there by "playing it safe." "</i><br /><br />Yes, it's unfortunate. We're all making choices between personal bliss and monetary return; playing it safe and going for broke. And some people are going for broke pursuing their perceived highest monetary return sacrificing everything in the present for that better future. <br /><br />What can be done? Besides reforming education and leveling the playing field economically, you have to let these things play out. People have to individually and collectively figure out what's important in life. GSThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15497631487656894980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-7434266126582340352013-10-27T12:21:34.986-04:002013-10-27T12:21:34.986-04:00"Well, it's the traditional way, and as f...<i>"Well, it's the traditional way, and as far as it goes, whatever. But, I'll argue, yes, there is something wrong with that if it means forcing your offspring to study and take jobs in areas that they are not interested in, or clearly have no aptitude for</i>"<br /><br />There must be some aptitude or else it would be a poor economic choice.<br /><br />I think the trouble is that people make life choices based merely on economic aptitude.<br /><br /><i>"When you have a society where so many people are training or trained for things they do not want to do, or will never do, you've stymied the creativity and the very vitality of that society."</i><br /><br />True.<br /><br /><i>"I've come to see such claims to enlightenment the same was I see claims of enlightenment from religionists: as an expression of subjective experience, not of actual reality."</i><br /><br />Subjective experience is reality. The hard part is maintaining that "enlightenment" in the midst of daily reality.<br /><br /><i>"People feel as if they're being incredibly selfless, and loving unconditionally. But those same people are often quiet concerned with forcing their children into a mold of their choosing"</i><br /><br />The road to hell is paved with good intentions.<br /><br /><i>"Again, I ask: are you speaking from experience? People like the make out the poorness of those prospects to be much more poor than they necessarily are. I'm not talking about someone who is tone deaf but dreams of singing opera: a sane, loving parent would certainly try to give such a child a reality check."</i><br /><br />I speak from experience and observation.<br /><br />When parents discourage their children from the entertainment industry, is that a reality check or misguided dissuasion?<br /><br />I think it's a reality check, mostly.<br /><br />But despite everything, there's something and someone supplying talent to the K-pop, k-Drama industries in Korea. Creative bodies are moving in and producing entertainment for greater Asia and the world. <br /><br /><i>"That's probably because the questioners are kids.<br /><br />What makes you think that?"</i><br /><br />Because only young people are unconcerned about the rent.<br /><br /><i>"note that most creatives I know got into the arts and literature when they were young."</i><br /><br />Yes, of course.<br /><br /><i>"Again, from experience: if you've walked away from a creative calling, it's VERY hard to go back to it. I know this from experience. I imagine you probably don't, from the degree of dismissiveness you express."</i><br /><br />If I'm dismissive, it's not because I don't respect art. I do. <br /><br />But I think motives and objectives matter. Why are you pursuing art? Do you really love art for arts sake? Or do you love the trappings of art -- fame, kudos, prestige, validation?<br /><br /><i>"As if no businessman or doctor were ever vain? As if no business major or medical student were ever pursuing his or her degree purely for reasons of vanity? This is what I'm talking about when I say the denigration of the arts and culture and creativity."</i><br /><br />Sure, there is vanity everywhere. But there is more vanity in the "entertainment arts".<br /><br /><i>"I think you're laboring under a misconception: your idea seems to be that unless one can become a millionaire, one should never pursue a calling. By that standard, people shouldn't do all kinds of jobs. Hell, we should all hold out for that CEO position, right? That's obviously stupid."</i><br /><br />No, I agree with you. I think the trouble is that most people who pursue "art" equate success with getting that role in a movie or drama; or performing in front of thousands. And when that doesn't happen (as it likely will not), that is interpreted as failure.<br /><br />And so when "success" is equivalent to winning the lottery, little wonder people have so many misgivings about pursuing the "arts". <br /><br />But if we can be happy with practicing our craft before small audiences then the pursuit of art becomes a reasonable pursuit.GSThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15497631487656894980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-17214975908143886722013-10-27T12:20:26.264-04:002013-10-27T12:20:26.264-04:00gordsellar: "I can think of cases in East Asi...<i>gordsellar: "I can think of cases in East Asian cultures where suicide or other violent self-destructive acts have been used as a protest of injustice."</i><br /><br />But suicide as an expression of protest is not what ails Korea. Koreans are killing themselves because they no longer feel their life is worth living.<br /><br /><i>"I can think of at least one scenario where more patents would actually be a symptom of lower innovation, or at least less-remarkable, secondary innovation, and that's where the company's R&D culture depends primarily on applying tiny refinements or modifications to a technology invented by someone else. Someone producing core technologies is going to include a lot more in a single patent application than someone whose company is basically remixing and fine-tuning, I'd guess. But as I say, I really don't know enough to say. I just know enough to say that no, your assertion doesn't necessarily follow."</i><br /><br />It may not necessarily follow but some positive correlation probably exists. Korea isn't getting rich making socks and shoes. Whether it's modifications or breakthrough inventions, Korea is doing something to create market value in the fields of high tech, manufacturing and engineering... and now increasingly, entertainment.<br /><br />Here's a novel idea in building design -- the first invisible tower:<br /><br />http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/12/travel/seoul-invisible-skyscraper-tower-infinity/<br /><br /><i>"some of the "measurements" invisibly privilege things that shouldn't necessarily be: for example, "tertiary efficiency" ends up meaning "the enrollment ration in all subjects for post-secondary students and the graduation of those who majored in science, engineering, manufacturing and construction." That's relatively meaningless, given the fact that overschooling is (and has long been) a problem in Korea"</i><br /><br />"Overschooling" may have diminishing returns but knowledge, even if not highly marketable, counts for something, I think.<br /><br /><i>"But South Korea's not terribly innovative when it comes to interface design: the best Samsung could do with Galaxy (the earlier models, anyway; I haven't seen anything recently) was to copy the iOS."</i><br /><br />Software design isn't Korea's forte (yet). And Samsung's Galaxy runs on Google Android, which was a copy of the iOS.<br /><br /><i>"But also, the arts. Part of my general point was that "success" is constantly attached to things like money and business, and that things like art, happiness, pleasure, and community have pretty much been jettisoned by Korean society."</i><br /><br />Yes, on some level.<br /><br /><i>"People hate the chaebols out of one side of their mouths, while longing to live among those lofty heights and mumbling praises out of the other side of their mouths. The amount of justification I've seen for elite corruption is mind-boggling, and that's not something you can force someone into... at least, not without a regime of thorough brainwashing I hardly think you're suggesting exists."</i><br /><br />You can't blame them too much. It's orthodox wisdom that the chaebols enrich the nation, so what's a little corruption if it means a trickled down prosperity for all, albeit an uneven one?<br /><br />So there are conflicting feelings here: resentment towards a systems that is tilted in favor of the wealthy at the expense of the middle class and poor, admiration for the powerful and rich, and gratitude that the very same big businesses pulled Korea out of the dark ages.GSThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15497631487656894980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-77029833379602348352013-10-20T20:52:31.436-04:002013-10-20T20:52:31.436-04:00Excellent article. There are really profound exces...Excellent article. There are really profound excesses to Korea's modernity that always bears pointing out. <br /><br />One thing not to be underestimated is how internationally aware Korea has become. This is from internet, pop culture, entertainment, export companies, tourism, and transplants. Korea is not the same country it was 10 years ago. To say nothing of 150! years ago. Or during the Joseon! era.<br />That's a long way back. Internationalizing the Korean consciousness is going to happen, like it or not. It's not a good idea to throw away all attachments to the past. But this is what Korea has been doing. Peter Kanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05998490567229724445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-38848791388052136162013-10-20T17:15:21.619-04:002013-10-20T17:15:21.619-04:00Something must be getting lost in the communicatio...<i>Something must be getting lost in the communication. Only an unreasonable man would suggest turning one's back on one's passions completely, even as a hobby.</i><br /><br />Also, to quote one of my Korean academic colleagues--one who few up in the West--"Ajummas are crazy." He was talking about the decisions mothers are enfranchised to make in terms of their kids' education, hobbies, etc. You say "unreasonable" like it's something that's rare in Korea, as if you know nothing of the schooling and cramming that goes on there under the watchful eyes of mom. Elementary schoolers are panicked about getting into a good university and having a good job. I think "reasonable" isn't an assumption we can make of serious participants in that system, willing or otherwise. <br /><br />I can say in my experience that most Koreans I've known don't have hobbies. I can count the number of them I've met who do on my fingers and toes, after over a decade in country. And I've heard PLENTY of stories of people being told their hobbies--playing piano, taxonomizing aliens, building model airplanes, drawing and sketching, writing songs--was a waste of time to be dropped so they could study more. (That's not to mention people whose stories include musical instruments being smashed or book collections being burned in a fit of pique by a decided insane parent… rare, though though always distressingly familiar in the telling.)<br /><br /><i>Sure... Carlos Slim is Mexican and the number of Indian billionaires makes you wonder about their so-called democracy. Nonetheless, average and median incomes are useful metrics.</i><br /><br />But only <i>so</i> useful. After all, why is India's suicide rate so much lower than Korea's? And the rhetoric I've seen in India regarding address it is miles ahead of what I've see in Korea. (Or, one could say, decades ahead.)<br /><br /><i>I'm not sure it's as bad as you make it sound. Notwithstanding culture, history and traditions, in the end, people are responsible for their own life choices to the extent they were able to make those choices. Modern Korea is still a work in progress and Koreans will have to figure out how to balance the pulls of social pressure, personal interests, values and the trappings of the good life. Maybe in another 20-30 years we'll see how they've settled in.</i><br /><br />For some, I assure you: it is every bit as bad as I make it sound. I know plenty of people who are trapped in relative poverty... and notably, almost none of them are the people pursuing the arts--most of whom have fine day jobs doing things like making stupid Kpop videos or working in publishing or even pursuing actual professions (like medicine or law) while also doing award-winning work in the arts.<br /><br />The people I know who are trapped in poverty are the ones who are are pushing 30 and still obsessively studying for <i>gongmuwon</i> exams they're unlikely to pass, or dealing with an incredibly selfish (unemployed, abusive, alcoholic) parent whom they ought to just disown, or who have given up their dreams to work in a job they hate... but couldn't stand to do it long enough to bankroll their so-called futures. Some are just unfortunate--I have one friend whose story is heartbreaking--but most of the people I know in dire straits ironically ended up there by "playing it safe."gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-31779345134710349172013-10-20T17:11:01.842-04:002013-10-20T17:11:01.842-04:00That's probably because the questioners are ki...<i>That's probably because the questioners are kids.</i><br /><br />What makes you think that? But even if we grant that, I'm going to overlook the chauvinism, and note that most creatives I know got into the arts and literature when they were young. They're not saying it because they're kids (with the implication that kids are dumb and out of touch and need to be yanked down to earth and bashed in the face with "reality", or, rather, with their lifelong obligation to be miserable) but rather because they're young enough not to have quite given in yet to the brainwashing. Again, from experience: if you've walked away from a creative calling, it's VERY hard to go back to it. I know this from experience. I imagine you probably don't, from the degree of dismissiveness you express.<br /><br />And that dismissiveness deserves a really long, hard look. The denigration of the arts and culture and creativity--and of young people--in Korea cannot, I'd argue, be separated from the very high rates of suicide, but also of depression, there.<br /><br /><i>Art? Or the pursuit of vanity?</i><br /><br />As if no businessman or doctor were ever vain? As if no business major or medical student were ever pursuing his or her degree purely for reasons of vanity? This is what I'm talking about when I say the denigration of the arts and culture and creativity.<br /><br /><i>Maybe because they know deep down that their dreams are a long shot and getting parental approval would help assuage some of their own personal misgivings?</i><br /><br />I think you're laboring under a misconception: your idea seems to be that unless one can become a millionaire, one should never pursue a calling. By that standard, people shouldn't do all kinds of jobs. Hell, we should all hold out for that CEO position, right? That's obviously stupid.<br /><br />But more importantly, you fail to see how your view is very much skewed, and specifically skewed in the extremely capitalistic direction that has been toxic to the arts and culture. Basically: people see actors as failures unless they are Hollywood names; authors don't matter unless they're best-sellers; musicians are irrelevant unless they're platinum-selling. John Ralston Saul has argued--and he's quite right--that it's the community playhouse, the small press (and its authors), and the local musicians who are the lifeblood of a national culture... and it is far from a long shot for someone to survive or thrive once they understand that, and design a career based on that understanding. Is it easy? No. But it's not like playing the lotto. On the contrary, it's more like any other competitive field: work your ass off, be smart about it, resign yourself to sometimes working a "day job" but be relentless and motivated, and given a little talent, you'll do okay at least. The dozens of musicians, writers, and actors I know in Korea (and abroad, too) can attest to that.<br /><br />By the way, yes: some people will fail, even with those more modest aims. But people fail in every field. Doctors fail--they get bored and screw up and kill a patient and a malpractice suit bars them from practicing. Teachers fail, and get fired for bucking the trend, or being poor teachers. (Not often enough, in Korea, but it happens.) Professors fail: they can't stand studying a subject they hate, plagiarize, get caught, and are booted from the field. Businesspeople fail. CEOs fail. Lawyers fail. That kind of failure is inevitable for some people who enter into every field. It's not a special property of the arts. People who pretend it is, usually are covering for a much bigger anxiety, one connected to their own personal economic dependency.<br /><br />Also: successful people fail, too. They just fail reflectively. The ability to fail reflectively seems--like most creativity--to depend on motivation above all else. It's a reality, but it's not a narrative that gets nearly enough recognition in Korea.<br /><br />gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-35898579662870584242013-10-20T17:04:59.821-04:002013-10-20T17:04:59.821-04:00"Having gotten pregnant, or inseminated someo...<i>"Having gotten pregnant, or inseminated someone, doesn't magically turn them loving and selfless and other-focused, something that is obvious though many of us like to pretend otherwise. Some of them are incredibly giving, some are incredibly selfish, and most are somewhere in the middle, just like non-parents."<br /><br />The parent-child relationship is pretty unique. To the extent children are the extension of self, parents are wont, naturally, to be unselfish with their children.<br /><br />I think there are few things in life that can really teach unconditional love and ego-expansion -- and parenthood is one of them.</i><br /><br />Well, and the operative word there is "can": we both know older people who haven't learned a bloody thing from experience, and we both, I'm sure, have met people whom parenthood has taught nothing of the sort that you mention above. I've come to see such claims to enlightenment the same was I see claims of enlightenment from religionists: as an expression of subjective experience, not of actual reality. People <i>feel</i> as if they're being incredibly selfless, and loving unconditionally. But those same people are often quiet concerned with forcing their children into a mold of their choosing--whether that mold is a liberal or a conservative one, assertive or passive, jocular or serious. It's nothing as simple as parents being flawed human beings: it's more like, parenthood is a flawed human enterprise, so much so that we really ought to look at the claims made by its proponents and practitioners with the criticality and awareness not to take their claims at face value.<br /><br /><i>Yes... having children is often not motivated by noble intentions. But out of our animal instincts are borne some of the most sublime when many of us learn for the very first time how to love someone more than ourselves unconditionally.</i><br /><br />So they claim. I, on the other hand, have seen only a few cases of people who actually behaved that way, in addition to claiming it.<br /><br /><i>Pursuing your dreams is not the hard part; it's the poor prospects of successfully living your dreams that dissuade and discourage us.</i><br /><br />Again, I ask: are you speaking from experience? People like the make out the poorness of those prospects to be much more poor than they necessarily are. I'm not talking about someone who is tone deaf but dreams of singing opera: a sane, loving parent would certainly try to give such a child a reality check. But the fact is that this isn't only true in the arts: people who don't love physics are bound to be crappy physicists. People who don't love engineering--the fine tuned math problems, the dilemmas and decision-making--are going to be crappy engineers. If Korean parents were routinely dashing their own hopes to have a doctorlawyerengineer child when faced with the reality that their son or daughter ought to be a nurse, or a painter, or to found and operate an indie-music routing circuit on the Korean peninsula--because that is where his or her aptitudes and interests and talents lie--then I'd buy the idea of prospects winning out over dreams. I've met <i>way</i> too many people studying something mom and dad forced them into, who know they're not going to work in the field, to think it's just pragmatism that drives that.<br /><br />In fact, I can say that in many cases I've seen, it's selfishness, pure and simple, and the kids realize it, admit it readily if just one person will come out and say it to them. I could give you examples that would blow your mind, but I know that anecdotal evidence isn't proof, so all I can say is that this is my long experience. (Not just with Korean parents, mind, though a lot of stuff seems to fly in Korea that one would never get away with in a lot of other places in the so-called developed world.)gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-79624053044747775602013-10-20T16:59:43.740-04:002013-10-20T16:59:43.740-04:00Obviously, people are willing, but doubtful there&...<i>Obviously, people are willing, but doubtful there's much eagerness to it. They're forced to go along, just as we all are.</i><br /><br />To some degree, yes. And there's also the efficiency with which the population has been depoliticized over the last couple of decades. (Which is to say, almost thoroughly.) But I think you're exaggerating: I think to some degree, Steinbeck's comment about Americans seeing themselves as "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" applies very much. People hate the chaebols out of one side of their mouths, while longing to live among those lofty heights and mumbling praises out of the other side of their mouths. The amount of justification I've seen for elite corruption is mind-boggling, and that's not something you can force someone into... at least, not without a regime of thorough brainwashing I hardly think you're suggesting exists.<br /><br /><i>Nothing wrong with that is there assuming one is not crass about it?</i><br /><br />Well, it's the traditional way, and as far as it goes, whatever. But, I'll argue, yes, there is something wrong with that if it means forcing your offspring to study and take jobs in areas that they are not interested in, or clearly have no aptitude for. There is something deeply wrong with that, especially when it becomes widespread in a society: those who ought to be playing music are working in dental clinics; those who ought to be sweeping floors are holding out for an executive position; those who ought not to be anywhere near a classroom are standing at the front, reading directly from the textbook (what passes for teaching far too often), because it's a stable job. And as one Korean academic (an econ guy) I know complained, it's quite distressing to see just how little interest in their field of specialty most Korean academics have. This is why Korea has a lot of academics, but very few intellectuals: most seem to regard academic work--research, conferences, and so on--as pure drudgery. (He and I compared notes regarding our experiences with Korean colleagues, as well as academic contacts abroad.)<br /><br />When you have a society where so many people are training or trained for things they do not want to do, or will never do, you've stymied the creativity and the very vitality of that society.gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-44218939756640565172013-10-20T16:58:55.891-04:002013-10-20T16:58:55.891-04:00I don't know... Korea is doing something right...<i>I don't know... Korea is doing something right.</i><br /><br /><i>http://www.bloomberg.com/slideshow/2013-02-01/50-most-innovative-countries.html#slide50</i><br /><br />Okay, now look at the other countries in the top ten list, and their stats, as well as the explanation of the terms:<br /><br />http://sipremium.info/2013/10/south-koreas-leading-rd/<br /><br />There's a lot of per-capita measurements there, which make me question the claims somewhat. Also, some of the "measurements" invisibly privilege things that shouldn't necessarily be: for example, "tertiary efficiency" ends up meaning "the enrollment ration in all subjects for post-secondary students and the graduation of those who majored in science, engineering, manufacturing and construction." That's relatively meaningless, given the fact that overschooling is (and has long been) a problem in Korea--and was even back in the Park era. Yes, everyone goes to university, and yes, plenty of people major in engineering, science, and so on. But, anecdotally, I've known plenty of Koreans who majored in science and engineering because they had high enough scores on their University Entrance Exams to do so, and were pushed into it family, but who hated the subject and graduated with no intention to work in the field. (Chem majors at my old school were notoriously uninterested in science: they told me most chem majors were only taking the subject to qualify for a pharmacy degree.)<br /><br /><i>What passes for "innovation" these days? Facebook? Twitter? Tumblr?</i><br /><br />I wouldn't argue they do, though I would argue social networking software <i>could </i> potentially be very profoundly innovative, if reconceptualized in the right way. Bruce Sterling spoke movingly (at the TED conference about the design problems faced by a South Korea that will someday have to integrate North Koreans (post-collapse) into their economy. Such design problems are not inconsiderable, and social networks will likely play a role in the design of interfaces and on the machines that those people will have to use to play a part in the South Korean economy at that time. But South Korea's not terribly innovative when it comes to interface design: the best Samsung could do with Galaxy (the earlier models, anyway; I haven't seen anything recently) was to copy the iOS.<br /><br />But I'd argue what passes for innovation these days mostly happens in the area of biotech, high-tech, and pharmacy; in developing new medical procedures, and medical discoveries. But also, the arts. Part of my general point was that "success" is constantly attached to things like money and business, and that things like art, happiness, pleasure, and community have pretty much been jettisoned by Korean society. In Korea, what passes for "innovation" is the current mayor of Seoul deciding to take a page from the rest of the developed world and set up suicide hotlines, which, apparently, are helping.<br /><br />One Korean elementary-schooler I know here in Saigon recently commented, on going back to Seoul for a week's visit, that he dislikes being in Korea if he can't be going to school. Not because he likes school, but because aside from school, there really is nowhere else outside the home for him to go and do stuff, or be with kids. Setting up more parks and public common areas in Seoul would pass for "innovation," these days... and would be an improvement in the lives of many, assuming that there were accompanying innovations in their working lives allowing them the time to actually visit those parks and common areas.gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-7525757016753613832013-10-20T16:58:19.957-04:002013-10-20T16:58:19.957-04:00GST:
Reposting, this time with formatting that go...GST:<br /><br />Reposting, this time with formatting that got borked when I posted last. <br /><br /><i>Interesting point: Self-destruction as opposed to mass-destruction. Still, I think there's a difference in quality that informs suicide vs. antisocial behavior. Anger predicates injustice. In suicide, the subject has lost feelings of hope and value.</i><br /><br />Overly simplistic. Anger and depression are both more complicated than this, and you're ignoring the socialization that predisposes people of one group to idolize acts of aggression (self-assertion) against strangers, versus dramatic displays self-abnegation before a (real or imagined) audience. I can think of cases in East Asian cultures where suicide or other violent self-destructive acts have been used as a protest of injustice.<br /><br /><i>You're right. It was a facile remark. But notwithstanding the problems with our patent system, there should be a loose correlation between patents and inventiveness.</i><br /><br />I don't really know enough to say, honestly, because I don't know the patent rules in Korea. There would be a lot of relevant questions, regarding differences in the rules governing the awarding of patents, differing corporate and popular strategies for the safeguarding of inventions, and so on.<br /><br />I can think of at least one scenario where more patents would actually be a symptom of lower innovation, or at least less-remarkable, secondary innovation, and that's where the company's R&D culture depends primarily on applying tiny refinements or modifications to a technology invented by someone else. Someone producing core technologies is going to include a lot more in a single patent application than someone whose company is basically remixing and fine-tuning, I'd guess. But as I say, I really don't know enough to say. I just know enough to say that no, your assertion doesn't necessarily follow.<br /><i></i><br /><br /><i>Did we really get a lot of new religions in the 20th century (relative to our population size)? I'm not sure we really have good data on that.</i><br /><br />Nah, it was a cheap example. But I do have a strong impression that, at least since the origins of state religions in the West, the time of greatest tolerance to random little religions, denominations, cults, and so forth has been in recent times... especially the last few hundred years, a period in which the power and relevance of religion has markedly declined for most of the developed world.gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-13277258394749856722013-10-20T16:49:17.290-04:002013-10-20T16:49:17.290-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-38152820539368244942013-10-20T16:47:54.267-04:002013-10-20T16:47:54.267-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-27500693734527516082013-10-19T17:18:22.431-04:002013-10-19T17:18:22.431-04:00"people who want to pursue their dreams badly...<i>"people who want to pursue their dreams badly enough--and who have the idea that it's possible--tend to fight to find a way to do it. They tend to figure out a way."</i><br /><br />Pursuing your dreams is not the hard part; it's the poor prospects of successfully living your dreams that dissuade and discourage us.<br /><br /><br /><i>"It's telling, though, that one of the common questions that would come up on Kim Hyung'-tae's message board (the Hwang Shin Hye guy) from young "aspiring artists" was not, "I am trying to do art and have no idea how to make ends meet, how did you do it when you were struggling?" It was always, "I want to do art, but my [parent*] won't let me." "</i><br /><br />That's probably because the questioners are kids.<br /><br /><br /><i>"why is it that young people were constantly saying that their parents were forbidding them to do art?"</i><br /><br />Art? Or the pursuit of vanity?<br /><br />Maybe because they know deep down that their dreams are a long shot and getting parental approval would help assuage some of their own personal misgivings?<br /><br /><br /><i>"It's not just that people have no room for hobbies, though: it's that there's a consistent pattern in South Korean society of people who have passions, being told they MUST give them up. That much, I can say, I've seen so often it's become an expectation, far more often upheld than broken. Almost every student who consulted with me saying, "I want to do X, I feel passionate about X," would add, "But my friends/parents/other professors [etc.] told me X is stupid and I MUST give up X and do Y instead." Not, "I should do X on the side and have a day job," which is sensible advice in the creative arts, but straight-up, whatever your passion is, you must turn your back on that... as if that were a requirement for adulthood. "</i><br /><br />Something must be getting lost in the communication. Only an unreasonable man would suggest turning one's back on one's passions completely, even as a hobby.<br /><br /><br /><i>"Well, "rich nations" and "poor nations" is kind of an old-fashioned dichotomy, too. There are islands of rich in poor countries, and islands (or whole floodplains) of poor in rich countries."</i><br /><br />Sure... Carlos Slim is Mexican and the number of Indian billionaires makes you wonder about their so-called democracy. Nonetheless, average and median incomes are useful metrics.<br /><br /><br /><i>"Korea has a floodplain of poverty, yes, far more than people who visit occasionally or live in Gangnam ever seem to realize, but it's not because people aren't being pressured enough to get a "good job": it's because people in Korea are overly pressured to get a "good job" (ie. a well-paying one) and to jettison everything that might stand in the way of doing so--even their own interests, passions, and aptitudes--and are so busy going through the motions of doing so, dwelling on the pain of what they give up for it, and repeating the cycle of enforcement on their own offspring, that they have been effectively depoliticized, to the point where assessing and acting in ways that might address that (growing) floodplain are simply out of the question."</i><br /><br />I'm not sure it's as bad as you make it sound. Notwithstanding culture, history and traditions, in the end, people are responsible for their own life choices to the extent they were able to make those choices. Modern Korea is still a work in progress and Koreans will have to figure out how to balance the pulls of social pressure, personal interests, values and the trappings of the good life. Maybe in another 20-30 years we'll see how they've settled in.GSThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15497631487656894980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-29832446977994200482013-10-19T17:15:42.608-04:002013-10-19T17:15:42.608-04:00gordsellar:
"You're presuming Korean soci...gordsellar:<br /><i>"You're presuming Korean society would go over the precipice the same way American society would. That ignores cultural differences, differences of behavior among laborers, and so on. A friend of mine once put it very well: rage can be directed outward--often as violence or abuse--or it can be directed inward, often leading to self-destructiveness and eventually suicide. One could argue that for whatever set of reasons, Koreans rage gets directed inward more often than outward... hence the suicide epidemic."</i><br /><br />Interesting point: Self-destruction as opposed to mass-destruction. Still, I think there's a difference in quality that informs suicide vs. antisocial behavior. Anger predicates injustice. In suicide, the subject has lost feelings of hope and value.<br /><br /><i>"That's like saying, "The twentieth century was the most spiritual of times, look how many new religions appeared!" Aren't most of those patents tweaks--modifications rather than creative innovations, in other words?"</i><br /><br />You're right. It was a facile remark. But notwithstanding the problems with our patent system, there should be a loose correlation between patents and inventiveness.<br /><br />Did we really get a lot of new religions in the 20th century (relative to our population size)? I'm not sure we really have good data on that.<br /><br /><br /><i>"(Not that all patents anywhere are "innovative" in this way, but I don't see a lot of brand-new products, or ideas, or anything, coming out of Korea. I see foreign technologies getting remixed slightly, and there is creativity involved in the remixing, arguably, but it's not creativity on the scale of desgining something new, straight from ideas.)"</i><br /><br />I don't know... Korea is doing something right. <br /><br />http://www.bloomberg.com/slideshow/2013-02-01/50-most-innovative-countries.html#slide50<br /><br />What passes for "innovation" these days? Facebook? Twitter? Tumblr?<br /><br /><br /><i>"That's probably part of it. But people are willing to go along with, or indeed, eager to go along with it, aren't they?"</i><br /><br />Obviously, people are willing, but doubtful there's much eagerness to it. They're forced to go along, just as we all are.<br /><br /><br /><i>"in part because people want their kids to be better off than they are, but also--crucially--because people expect their adult children to support them when they get too old to work themselves. A lot of parents betray that concern, even when they won't admit it directly: it's often unspoken but a clear expectation on both sides, especially if the kids manage to do okay or well for themselves."</i><br /><br />Nothing wrong with that is there assuming one is not crass about it?<br /><br /><br /><i>"Having gotten pregnant, or inseminated someone, doesn't magically turn them loving and selfless and other-focused, something that is obvious though many of us like to pretend otherwise. Some of them are incredibly giving, some are incredibly selfish, and most are somewhere in the middle, just like non-parents."</i><br /><br />The parent-child relationship is pretty unique. To the extent children are the extension of self, parents are wont, naturally, to be unselfish with their children.<br /><br />I think there are few things in life that can really teach unconditional love and ego-expansion -- and parenthood is one of them.<br /><br /><i>"Most people aren't sure why they had kids, once you get the to sit and think about it for ten minutes, though we all kind some of it is social expectations, some a kind of instinctual thing, and some of it is a desire for self-propagation. Plus some people--maybe a lot--want a little living dollie to dress up as they please.)"</i><br /><br />Yes... having children is often not motivated by noble intentions. But out of our animal instincts are borne some of the most sublime when many of us learn for the very first time how to love someone more than ourselves unconditionally.GSThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15497631487656894980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-39493391342651096892013-10-17T14:23:35.413-04:002013-10-17T14:23:35.413-04:00Note: The parents of people I've known back in...Note: The parents of people I've known back in the West--in North America specifically--almost always urged that their children's passions become a hobby, or, failing that, that a practical trade or profession be chosen for a day job unless or until their child could support himself or herself from the passion... unless their kid was an obvious genius, or had a killer idea, or whatever. But I can't remember one case where a Western parent did what the norm is in Korea, saying, "Stop [doing the thing you're passionate about] FOREVER and get a job.") <br /><br />A Korean political scientist friend of mine has argued the dynamic is actually very simple: most South Koreans, she's said, actually are miserable, and misery loves company. People cannot express too much happiness because it brings down a retaliation by the miserable. One who expresses job satisfaction gets shunned; one who is "too nice" or "too loving" (I mean kindly or gentle or nice, not sucking face) to one's spouse might be reprimanded or told one is being "too mushy." It's a short step from openly resenting the happiness of others to (however subconsciously) sabotaging it. <br /><br />And given the fact that when most Koreans I hang out with (and also many anecdotes I've heard from friends) see a nice, friendly, supportive, and loving family as the exception rather than the rule--so much so that they comment in shock when they meet one--I think it's not so hard to believe that what parents claim they want for their children, and what they actually steer their children towards, are two very different things. <br /><br />(I should also note that I don't think Western parents are necessarily better. They probably tend more commonly to fail in different directions, though, such as poor setting of boundaries, higher rates of neglect (as opposed to toxic micromanagement, though there are some who do that). I'm not saying Korean parents are unique in the disconnect between their claimed desire for their kids happiness and the lives they help build for their kids. I'm just calling BS on the idea we should take that claim at face value. <br /><br /><i>Korea is also still the poor kid on the block of rich nations. There's more work to be done.</i><br /><br />Well, "rich nations" and "poor nations" is kind of an old-fashioned dichotomy, too. There are islands of rich in poor countries, and islands (or whole floodplains) of poor in rich countries. Korea has a floodplain of poverty, yes, far more than people who visit occasionally or live in Gangnam ever seem to realize, but it's not because people aren't being pressured enough to get a "good job": it's because people in Korea are overly pressured to get a "good job" (ie. a well-paying one) and to jettison everything that might stand in the way of doing so--even their own interests, passions, and aptitudes--and are so busy going through the motions of doing so, dwelling on the pain of what they give up for it, and repeating the cycle of enforcement on their own offspring, that they have been effectively depoliticized, to the point where assessing and acting in ways that might address that (growing) floodplain are simply out of the question. <br /><br />That's how economic instabilities work, of course, to secure the perpetuity of the system. But seldom does one see the monstrous tendrils for this so deeply wound about in social and cultural attitudes towards practically everything. gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-40245804942680872612013-10-17T14:09:07.674-04:002013-10-17T14:09:07.674-04:00...but how? The collective memory of poverty makes...<i>...but how? The collective memory of poverty makes Korean parents very practical, perhaps. It's romantic to pursue your dreams but when you're struggling to pay the rent, pursuing the dream can get old fast.</i> <br /><br />Are you speaking from experience pursuing your dreams? I have experience doing so, and in fact so do a lot of my friends. And here's the thing: people who want to pursue their dreams badly enough--and who have the idea that it's possible--tend to fight to find a way to do it. They tend to figure out a way. What we see in Korea is not the idea that one should pursue one's dreams on the side: in fact, talk to musicians and you'll find a lot of them believe the only way to pursue music is to do it full time; if you have a job outside music, you can't do music. Same for art, and all kinds of things. The writers are a little less brainwashed about this, but it was a common attitude among the Korean musicians I know--and I was on the indie music scene for several years, just after the turn of the century. People in Seoul and out in the boonies thought that way. <br /><br />(And of course one reason they thought that was because for many South Koreans, once you get a job, that job becomes your life. You may just be sitting playing bejeweled for hours in the evening, waiting for your idiot boss to go home, or you may be sitting drinking with the work team three nights a week, but music? Forget about it.)<br /><br />It's telling, though, that one of the common questions that would come up on Kim Hyung'-tae's message board (the Hwang Shin Hye guy) from young "aspiring artists" was not, "I am trying to do art and have no idea how to make ends meet, how did you do it when you were struggling?" It was always, "I want to do art, but my [parent*] won't let me." Kim was so disgusted with hearing this over and over that finally he told someone off saying (approximately), "If you want to do it, you will and nobody, not even your mom, can stop you. If you don't want to do it badly enough, quit blaming your mother and being a wimp, and admit you don't want to do it badly enough." Kim's response, I could talk about for hours, but I'll just set it aside and say, why is it that young people were constantly saying that their parents were forbidding them to do art?<br /><br />It's not just that people have no room for hobbies, though: it's that there's a consistent pattern in South Korean society of people who have passions, being told they MUST give them up. That much, I can say, I've seen so often it's become an expectation, far more often upheld than broken. Almost every student who consulted with me saying, "I want to do X, I feel passionate about X," would add, "But my friends/parents/other professors [etc.] told me X is stupid and I MUST give up X and do Y instead." Not, "I should do X on the side and have a day job," which is sensible advice in the creative arts, but straight-up, whatever your passion is, you must turn your back on that... as if that were a requirement for adulthood. <br />gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-17709398573420469302013-10-17T14:02:44.100-04:002013-10-17T14:02:44.100-04:00I think a lot of the problems may stem from Korea&...<i>I think a lot of the problems may stem from Korea's economic model, the effects of which trickle down to all aspects of Korean society. </i><br /><br />That's probably part of it. But people are willing to go along with, or indeed, eager to go along with it, aren't they? The people in the mom&pops dream of their kids becoming part of that machine... in part because people want their kids to be better off than they are, but also--crucially--because people expect their adult children to support them when they get too old to work themselves. A lot of parents betray that concern, even when they won't admit it directly: it's often unspoken but a clear expectation on both sides, especially if the kids manage to do okay or well for themselves. <br /><br />Which brings me to this: <br /><br /><i>All parents want their children to be happy... </i><br /><br />All parents claim to want their children to be happy. I think, though, that what parents claim needs to be separated from how they behave. Even parents who beat their clearly depressed children, or terrify them with talk of hell (and get off on doing so) claim they want their kids to be happy. Parents are experts at making all kinds of claims to selflessness, to endless love for their children... but the reality is less magical. Parents are just people who happened to reproduce, by choice or otherwise. Having gotten pregnant, or inseminated someone, doesn't magically turn them loving and selfless and other-focused, something that is obvious though many of us like to pretend otherwise. Some of them are incredibly giving, some are incredibly selfish, and most are somewhere in the middle, just like non-parents. <br /><br />(And this, of course, is universal. Hell, if you start asking people why they had kids in the first place, you hear a lot of questionable, self-glorifying things. But as soon as you start examining the reasons people give, you start realizing the disconnect between proffered explanations, and the inability of people to explain those explanations deeper or further. Most people aren't sure why they had kids, once you get the to sit and think about it for ten minutes, though we all kind some of it is social expectations, some a kind of instinctual thing, and some of it is a desire for self-propagation. Plus some people--maybe a lot--want a little living dollie to dress up as they please.) <br /><br />Even with evolutionarily programmed emotional drives to have one's offspring thrive, there's far too much evidence for the fact that miserable parents love miserable children as company, and the Korean mainstream's idea of acceptable treatment for children--schooling to the point of exhaustion, no time to play or exercise, general approval of physical and psychological abuse by fascistic teachers, and sequestration in study from an increasingly early age, along with incredible stress and academic pressure that they themselves never endured as children, but which they do endure as adults--reveals that lots of parents are quite content to let their children suffer quite hideously. That they justify it on the basis of necessity and their love for their children doesn't mean that the necessity or the love are actually the reasons they inflict this on their kids: it signifies only that those are the socially acceptable justifications for inflicting misery on children... and misery of a kind that is markedly isomorphic to the misery that adult working Koreans themselves are expected to endure. <br /><br />(Just as young Korean women claim that they "need" plastic surgery to get a job interview, when we all know there are plenty of other pressures driving droves of young Korean women to get these operations.) <br /><br />gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-51851112942661810552013-10-17T13:54:04.856-04:002013-10-17T13:54:04.856-04:00GST:
I'm surprised "geeky" Koreans ...GST:<br /><br /><i>I'm surprised "geeky" Koreans aren't interested in this stuff.</i><br /><br />I was too, but it really does seem like even among the small subset of Koreans interested in science fiction, most aren't interested in the science part of it so much as the techno-gadget part of it. That perhaps shouldn't surprise us for two reasons: Japanese SF has been a big influence, and is comparable; and SF in the West was more like this early on, too... the era of Gernsback pulps lives on best in the tradition of James Bond gadgets. <br /><br /><i>I think both egalitarians and libertarians are appalled by what passes for capitalism today.</i> <br /><br />I'd like to think so, but it seems to me like most people on both sides have just sort of accepted it as the inescapable fact of reality, almost like a natural law. (And especially the American Libertarians I know seem to have more objections to those who are appalled--whom they characterize as wannabe-freeloaders and whiners and entitled punks--than to what passes for capitalism today.)<br /><br /><i>Korea has probably not yet gone over the precipice or else we'd see crime skyrocket and its social fabric come unglued.</i> <br /><br />You're presuming Korean society would go over the precipice the same way American society would. That ignores cultural differences, differences of behavior among laborers, and so on. A friend of mine once put it very well: rage can be directed outward--often as violence or abuse--or it can be directed inward, often leading to self-destructiveness and eventually suicide. One could argue that for whatever set of reasons, Koreans rage gets directed inward more often than outward... hence the suicide epidemic. <br /><br /><i>Creativity and ingenuity can't be all dead in Korea. It has one of the highest patent rates in the world.</i><br /><br />That's like saying, "The twentieth century was the most spiritual of times, look how many new religions appeared!" Aren't most of those patents tweaks--modifications rather than creative innovations, in other words? (Not that all patents anywhere are "innovative" in this way, but I don't see a lot of brand-new products, or ideas, or anything, coming out of Korea. I see foreign technologies getting remixed slightly, and there is creativity involved in the remixing, arguably, but it's not creativity on the scale of desgining something new, straight from ideas.) <br /><br />gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-47880121844009482952013-10-17T02:48:11.263-04:002013-10-17T02:48:11.263-04:00gordsellar: "But science is one of those thin...gordsellar: <i>"But science is one of those things not immediately monetizable, and so--despite various efforts by the Park and Chun dictatorships to popularize science, almost nobody in Korea really is interested."</i><br /> <br />I'm surprised "geeky" Koreans aren't interested in this stuff.<br /><br /><i>"I agree that the worldwide adoption of the kind of capitalistic modernity we've seen happen is unfortunate, I really do. I think it's the main dilemma with which we're faced now, from which all of our other problems spring."</i><br /><br />I think both egalitarians and libertarians are appalled by what passes for capitalism today.<br /><br /><i>"But to generalize in this way is to overlook differences in degree that are really significant"</i><br /><br />I agree.<br /><br /><i>"Almost every Korean I've known who's left Korea and come back after an extended absence has complained not just of how money-centric South Korea has become, but also of how all other values--community, family, everything--have been absolute jettisoned in the last twenty or thirty years."</i><br /><br />Korea has probably not yet gone over the precipice or else we'd see crime skyrocket and its social fabric come unglued. <br /><br /><i>"That probably sounds all subjective, and I'm willing to see statistics that contradict my observations... but I haven't seen stats that contradict them yet."</i><br /><br />Creativity and ingenuity can't be all dead in Korea. It has one of the highest patent rates in the world.<br /><br />I think a lot of the problems may stem from Korea's economic model, the effects of which trickle down to all aspects of Korean society. <br /><br />What is Korea's economic model? Some variant of state-led corporate fascism, perhaps. Under this reverse Robin Hood system, salaried workers, mom/pop shops and small businesses are serfs in a feudal society ruled by the lords of the realm: Samsung, Hyundai, LG, and other chaebols.<br /><br /><i>"But we can certainly move from anecdotal evidence, to test cases. For example, "I don't care what you do with your life, as long as you're happy," obviously isn't something every parent says to every child in North America. But it is well within the realm of mainstream parenting attitudes--it is both familiar and unremarkable among Western parents to hold happiness as an end, rather than wealth as an end. Meanwhile, whenever a Korean expresses such an attitude, the Koreans I know who comment on it approvingly note how unusual or uncommon an attitude it is, and that "normal" in Korea means pressuring one's offspring to get a "good job" (for varying definitions of "good.")"</i><br /><br />All parents want their children to be happy, but how? The collective memory of poverty makes Korean parents very practical, perhaps. It's romantic to pursue your dreams but when you're struggling to pay the rent, pursuing the dream can get old fast. Korea is also still the poor kid on the block of rich nations. There's more work to be done.GSThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15497631487656894980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-63884351167910154922013-10-15T03:57:13.397-04:002013-10-15T03:57:13.397-04:00(cont.)
And most of all, while money is a concern...(cont.)<br /><br />And most of all, while money is a concern everywhere, it isn't so extreme as to inhibit everything from the arts, to civil society, to education, to entepreneurship to the degree that those things are radically inhibited in Korea. I know it's not just the money centrism--Koreans are also very high on the scale of risk aversion, especially when it comes to career/money stuff. But the money-centrism trickles down--it justifies the excessive schooling, which inhibits hobbies and interests, which are the hotbed of entrepreneurship, of risky decisions that pay off not just financially but in terms of development, growth, and intangible rewards, of innovation... all things that are in desperately short supply in Korea. <br /><br />And while I have issues with happiness-centism as an alternative, when your society is leading the world in suicide, it's time start asking yourself what's wrong in the fundamental values. Suicide is about deep unhappiness, about despair. Money issues don't cause suicide in people who feel hope, who believe that they're on the right path and struggling. (When money is a means to an end, the lack of it just means you have to stuggle harder to reach you end; something common among artists and creatives, as well as among people who put their families first, and so on.) But when money is the end itself (path that in Korea often entails ignoring the self--one's interests, predilections, and passions), then the extended lack of it ends up simply being failure manifest... and having been well-trained in the tactics of self-abnegation, people just perform the last, and most complete, self-abnegation of all. <br /><br />That probably sounds all subjective, and I'm willing to see statistics that contradict my observations... but I haven't seen stats that contradict them yet. I have seen enough anecdotal evidence in my experiences, and those of my wife, of friends, of colleagues, that I feel pretty secure in believing nobody will be able to produce solid contradictory evidence. The strongest of which is that every intelligent or creative Korean I know (and we'e lucky enough to know a lot of both) has said to me some variation of the same thing I'm saying: South Koreas's miserable because the fundamental value system is screwed up and centered on money to the exclusion of everything else. <br /><br />But we can certainly move from anecdotal evidence, to test cases. For example, "I don't care what you do with your life, as long as you're happy," obviously isn't something every parent says to every child in North America. But it is well within the realm of mainstream parenting attitudes--it is both familiar and unremarkable among Western parents to hold happiness as an end, rather than wealth as an end. Meanwhile, whenever a Korean expresses such an attitude, the Koreans I know who comment on it approvingly note how unusual or uncommon an attitude it is, and that "normal" in Korea means pressuring one's offspring to get a "good job" (for varying definitions of "good.") <br /><br />I'm sure readers can think up an array of similar test cases. gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-1362454381582000592013-10-15T03:56:38.669-04:002013-10-15T03:56:38.669-04:00GST,
Ha, but my point was not about whether one ...GST, <br /><br />Ha, but my point was not about whether one cares for astronauts or figure skaters. Yi So-yeon is not just a trained monkey, she is a scientist and she was the first Korean to go to outer space. That resonates less for people than some girl who learned to figure skate real good. One is a sporting event the importance of which is hyperbolically exaggerated for the purposes of firming up national identity (one of the few glues that hold together this money-centric society) while the other is a person involved in the investigation of the universe and of our own species itself. (Her speciality is biotech, after all.) <br /><br />But science is one of those things not immediately monetizable, and so--despite various efforts by the Park and Chun dictatorships to popularize science, almost nobody in Korea really is interested. (To the point that Korean SF authors have complained to me that they actually have to cut back on the "science" in their science fiction to accomodate the tastes of a reading public that complains of "too much science" in an SF novel. And I'm not talking hardcore "hard" SF like Hal Clement or Greg Egan, either.) <br /><br /><i>Korea may be money on steroids, but everything is, in the end, about money, everywhere, unfortunately.</i><br /><br />I agree that the worldwide adoption of the kind of capitalistic modernity we've seen happen is unfortunate, I really do. I think it's the main dilemma with which we're faced now, from which all of our other problems spring. <br /><br />But to generalize in this way is to overlook differences in degree that are really significant--differences in degree so extreme that they finally synthesize differences in kind. All of those things I mentioned above are happening to some degree in any developed society--some people are always marrying for money, the arts are always subject to funding cuts, overeducation is always happening to some degree, overwork is increasing all over... but the degree to which it's seen in Korea is seems to be very much in excess of what we see in the rest of the OECD. All I can say is that it's not just Westerners I've known who were shocked by the money-centrism of Korea: many of the foreign exchange students I met from places like Russia, Taiwan, and China were shocked that students would major in subjects they literally hate just to "get a good job" in the numbers that one sees in Korea. Almost every Korean I've known who's left Korea and come back after an extended absence has complained not just of how money-centric South Korea has become, but also of how all other values--community, family, everything--have been absolute jettisoned in the last twenty or thirty years. <br /><br />gordsellarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11465812613427778240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-53184549355296289372013-10-15T02:17:15.701-04:002013-10-15T02:17:15.701-04:00"(Korea's first astronaut got less attent...<i>"(Korea's first astronaut got less attention than Korea's last gold-medal figure skater, mind-bogglingly.)"</i><br /><br />I don't know... personally, I don't care much for astronauts either.<br /><br />Obviously, both were firsts. But winning the gold medal in figure skating requires talent and skill while even a monkey can fly into space. :)<br /><br /><i>"Arts, culture, living environment, entertainment, fashion, choice of major field of study, choice of career: everything in South Korea seems, within the set of values embraced by the mainstream, to hinge on money, over and above (or even in direct contradiction of) personal predilections or interests or inclinations."</i><br /><br />Korea may be money on steroids, but everything is, in the end, about money, everywhere, unfortunately.GSThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15497631487656894980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-22464366383498865702013-10-15T01:39:02.476-04:002013-10-15T01:39:02.476-04:00"In order for Asians to fully develop and mod...<i>"In order for Asians to fully develop and modernize not just economically but also culturally, we need to stop being in denial and recognize problems where they exist. Constantly being in denial and acting as if it's totally natural for all Asians to mysteriously strive away from Asianness and towards Whiteness is a deep insult."</i><br /><br />What aesthetic ideals should Koreans hold in your view that would reflect more "Asianness" and less "whiteness"?<br /> <br />Should Koreans desire smaller eyes because it is the trajectory that further makes us different from whites?<br /><br />It's not "Asian" to prefer small eyes and dark skin. There is probably no culture on earth that holds small eyes and some dark shade of brown to be aesthetic ideals.<br /><br />From the same article:<br /><br /><b>"Quite simply," says Dr. Lay, "the reason Asian eyelid surgery is so popular is the same reason blepharoplasty in general is popular: because larger eyes are universally considered beautiful. Asian people – like most people - find larger eyes more attractive. It has little to nothing to do with the influence of Westernization."</b><br /><br />Contrary to politically correct beliefs, beauty is not wholly subjective. The parts that are subjective generally lie within relatively solid parameters.<br /><br />But I think there are at least a couple areas where we probably did go backwards as a result of Western influence. Most Asians today prefer taller noses and more horse inspired faces, but in my view, smaller noses and flatter faces are the natural aesthetic ideals.<br /><br />On the other side, hairless skin is an ideal that many Westerners have to shave and wax to achieve. Are they trying to be more Asian?<br /><br />Body odor is also a no-no that Asians in general have fewer problems with. And softer, more refined "metrosexual" features are a trend in the West that are probably inevitable over time. Are they trying to be more Asian?<br /><br />Despite Europeans' relative hairiness and stink, there are few Asians trying to give off more odor or grow more body hair.GSThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15497631487656894980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36405856.post-50095954516789839122013-10-15T01:37:20.449-04:002013-10-15T01:37:20.449-04:00"Koreans may not get eyelid surgery to look m...<i>"Koreans may not get eyelid surgery to look more white, but they are certainly doing it to look less stereotypically Asian and to adhere to a more Eurocentric standard of beauty."</i><br /><br />I think we have to be careful how we interpret aesthetic trends.<br /><br />Some things are natural and inevitable (the desire for bigger eyes), other things are wholly arbitrary (Western style fashion).<br /><br /><br /><i>"Did you know that the Asian eyelid surgery was invented by a white American army surgeon who felt that Asians needed it in order to improve their appearance?"</i><br /><br />This is not relevant. And people are wont to interpret the world through their cultural prism.<br /><br /><br /><i>"Having grown up in Southern California, home to a large Korean American community, Professor Lee became interested in the explanations for Korea’s high plastic surgery rate. In her research, she found that the Korean standard of beauty has been influenced by the Western look"</i><br /><br />People are also wont to interpret the world through the prism of the dominant culture.<br /><br />Of course, Western aesthetics have influenced everything, but Asians are not trying to achieve Western looking eyes. When that happens, it's called a botched job.<br /><br /><br /><i>"If the eyelid surgery was looked at without context, then perhaps your point would be stronger. But if you look at the bigger picture, it simply becomes yet another part of the consistent pattern of wannabe Westernization among Asians."</i><br /><br />Again, we have to be careful how we interpret aesthetic trends. Some things are natural and inevitable. Western beauty standards have influenced modern aesthetics everywhere, but the influence only turbocharged what were already existing or inevitable trends: taller, whiter, slimmer, more muscular, etc.<br /><br />Larger eyes are an aesthetic preference shared by everyone.<br /><br />http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/julie-chens-asian-eyelid-surgery-san-francisco-surgeon-weighs-in-223930281.html<br /><br /><b>Lay, who has traveled extensively in Asia to educate colleagues about blepharoplasty (eyelid surgery) and rhinoplasty on Asian faces, says "The idea that women undergo these surgeries to look more Caucasian, or to 'Westernize' their features, reflects a lack of understanding of the Asian culture."</b><br /><br />How do you explain the peculiar aesthetic trends in Korea and Japan today? The move towards hyper neotenic traits and features, and the desire for everything "cute" are very un-eurocentric. <br /><br />I think this puts to the lie that the East is slavishly chained to Western aesthetics.GSThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15497631487656894980noreply@blogger.com